The Government has stated protecting the green belt is a "priority" after responding to accusations that its housing targets are causing a "destruction" of the countryside.
Councils across the country are currently identifying land within its districts to meet aspirational Government targets of building 300,000 homes a year.
Locally, councils across Hertfordshire have been putting together a new vast planning document called a Local Plan which primarily sets about allocating which pieces of land are most appropriate to build new homes on.
One of the country's leading environmental groups, The Countryside Charity, says local authorities in Hertfordshire are allocating 54,537 new homes on green belt land in the county, which is on top of around 17,000 that have been approved or are being built.
A spokesperson for The Countryside Charity said: "Building 72,000 new homes on Hertfordshire’s countryside will not solve our housing problem. Our research nationally shows that only around 10 per cent of new homes that are built in the green belt are considered affordable.
"This destruction of our countryside is counter to the commitments given by the Government to protect the green belt and to national planning policy which affords protection to our green belt."
Currently, and in line with national planning policies, developers must demonstrate "very special circumstances" to receive permission from local councils to build in the green belt.
However the Countryside Charity, formerly known as the Campaign to Protect Rural England, says there is a "growing disconnect" between recent Government statements and the application of planning policy at a local level.
The organisation has pointed towards the Government's decision to stick with basing its housing targets on 2014 data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
It has called on councils to set local plans using the latest ONS data and exclude green belt from its allocation sites, and also called for MPs and council leaders to press the Government to clarify planning policy.
According to council papers published by Dacorum Borough Council in July, on 21 June this year during a parliamentary debate on planning decisions, the housing minister restated the Government's "commitment" to protecting the green belt, explicitly stating local authorities should not develop on the green belt, except for in exceptional circumstances.
The papers add the minister said the local plan should "recognise the green belt as a constraint on numbers".
However, the Dacorum papers also referred to a recent decision made by a Government planning inspector to overruled a council's decision to refuse around 100 homes on green belt land in Colney Heath, near St Albans - prompting Dacorum Borough Council to pause its local plan process.
Related: Dacorum Council delays Local Plan citing Government policy 'uncertainty'
Representatives from Liberal Democrat-run councils like Three Rivers and Watford have told the Observer in the past about the difficulties they claim they have of challenging housing targets and spoken about the threat of the Tory-run Government taking over local plans if the council does not show to meet its targets.
But councils are also facing backlash from residents who are accusing officers and councillors of failing to stop developments with a protest recently held in Carpenders Park.
However, other data shows councils, including borth Watford and Three Rivers have been failing to meet housing targets already set.
Related: Hundreds join protest opposing development in Carpenders Park
Related: Three Rivers residents call on council to fight housing targets
Related: Three Rivers District Council to 'refuse' to build on certain greenbelt sites
In light of what councils have told us, protests and petitions, comments from The Countryside Charity, and Dacorum Borough Council's comments on the local plan process, the Observer posed a series of questions to the Ministry of Housing, Local Government, and Communities (MHCLG).
We asked whether it was the Government's view that green belt land should be "protected at all costs", and whether councils like Three Rivers and Hertsmere - which have vast green belt - can use the local plan to demonstrate that it cannot meet its targets without building on protected land.
We also asked whether the local plan can be used to challenge housing targets - as claimed by Watford MP Dean Russell in a letter to Watford borough councillors just hours before members agreed to submit the council's local plan to Government.
Related: Watford Council snubs MP claim and presses on with 12,000 homes plan
The department was also asked what risks the council takes on if it submits a local plan that failed to meet housing targets, and also whether it is still the case that housing need should never be a reason to cause "unacceptable harm" to protected landscapes and the green belt, as outlined in the Government Changes to the current planning system document published towards the end of 2020.
An MHCLG spokesperson responded: "Decisions to release green belt land are made by local councils, not central government. Protecting the green belt is a priority and our national planning policy reinforces regenerating brownfield sites and prioritising urban areas.
"Our reforms to the planning system will protect our cherished countryside and green spaces as well as deliver high-quality and sustainable homes.
"Green belt decisions will remain with councils and communities, ensuring they have influence over development, location and design."
The MHCLG pointed us towards the National Planning Policy Framework which it states is clear that "most new building is inappropriate in green belt, and should be refused planning permission unless there are "very special circumstances".
A spokesperson added the Government's Planning for the Future white paper sets out that, through its "ambitious planning reforms", its aim to "promote the stewardship and improvement of our precious countryside and environment, ensuring that important natural assets are preserved".
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel